My objection is that it turns the thing into a logic puzzle, where Agents can just spam D-Ops with guesses until they work it out by process of elimination. In fact it makes submitting a Surveillance Report itself a source of information.

I’m surprised by the expectation that I “prob wouldn’t” just say yes or no to a report, but would instead help the player out. Although it’s not explicitly in the ruleset, I’m assuming that all secret information can only be shared when the ruleset explicitly forces me to.

How broken is the spam solution here? The quickest one-man solution I can think of off the top of my head is to accuse everyone of being an arbitrary Allegiance (and get back the number of Agents of that Allegiance), then submit a string of one-Agent reports until you hit that number. You can double the speed by having an accomplice submitting half those reports, triple it by having two accomplices, etc, although this opens you up to being lied to.

Of course, this opens up the usual problem of one player who cares about winning recruiting two players who don’t care about winning, to acquire information. It’d be nice to introduce a realistic possibility of betrayal into that, but I’m not sure how.

S/K.

@Kev: Wasn’t trying to sound like a twit there lol. But we couldn’t really spam you anyway, since we’d have to send reports with atleast 3 pairings everytime.